Committee of Ministers Secrétariat Du Comité Des Ministres
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
SECRETARIAT / SECRÉTARIAT SECRETARIAT OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS SECRÉTARIAT DU COMITÉ DES MINISTRES Contact: Zoë Bryanston-Cross Tel: 03.90.21.59.62 Date: 27/11/2020 DH-DD(2020)1109 Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. Meeting: 1390th meeting (1-3 December 2020) (DH) Communication from the Cypriot authorities (26/11/2020) in the case of Cyprus v. Turkey (Application No. 25781/94) Information made available under Rule 8.2a of the Rules of the Committee of Ministers for the supervision of the execution of judgments and of the terms of friendly settlements. * * * * * * * * * * * Les documents distribués à la demande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres. Réunion : 1390e réunion (1-3 décembre 2020) (DH) Communication des autorités chypriotes (26/11/2020) relative à l’affaire Chypre c. Turquie (requête n° 25781/94) [anglais uniquement] Informations mises à disposition en vertu de la Règle 8.2a des Règles du Comité des Ministres pour la surveillance de l’exécution des arrêts et des termes des règlements amiables. DH-DD(2020)1109: Communication from Cyprus. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. CYPRUS v TURKEY Application No. 25781/94 DGI 26 NOV. 2020 1390th CM(DH} MEETING, DECEMBER 2020 SERVICE DE L’EXECUTION MEMORANDUM DES ARRETS DE LA CEDH BY THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS MISSING PERSONS PAYMENT OF JUST SATISFACTION INTRODUCTION 1. lt has been a year since the Deputies decided to resume consideration of the execution of the judgment in Cyprus v Turkey in relation to the missing persans, at their 136ih meeting of December 2019. The Republic of Cyprus is grateful to the Deputies for their continued attention to this important humanitarian issue. 2. lt has been almost 20 years since the Court handed down its main judgment in the case. Nonetheless, the Respondent state continues to demonstrate defiance for that judgment, as well as for the Court's Just Satisfaction judgment of 2014 whereby it awarded €90 million to be paid for the benefit of the relatives of the missing persans and the enclaved Greek Cypriot residents of the Karpas peninsula. That defiance is demonstrated by the information provided in Turkey's Memorandum for this meeting, or rather by the lack of it. No new information has been forthcoming which would indicate a fulfilment of the Respondent state's obligations under the Convention identified by the Court in its main judgment. Furthermore, the Respondent state is once again silent on the issue of its unconditional obligation to pay the just satisfaction awarded by the Court. JUST SATISFACTION 3. Despite the Deputies' repeated insistence over the years, Turkey continues to date to withhold payment of the amounts awarded by the Court as just satisfaction in its judgment of 12 May 2014. Most recently, by their Decisions of December 2019, the Deputies "insisted again firmly on the unconditional obligation of Turkey ta pay the just satisfaction awarded by the [Court]" with its judgment of 2014 "without Jurther de/ay". DH-DD(2020)1109: Communication from Cyprus. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. This insistence has since been repeated by the Deputies in their Decisions at their 1377bis meeting of September 2020. 4. Turkey consistently fails not only to make payment, in defiance of both the Court's judgment and the Deputies Decisions, but even to set out a plan for payment, or to inform the Deputies of any progress in that direction. These failures, years after the Court handed down its judgment, can only be regarded as deliberate. ln a further display of disregard, no indication or mention of the issue is made in its recent Memorandum.1 5. The Republic of Cyprus deeply regrets that Turkey still remains in flagrant violation of its international obligations under Article 46 of the Convention, having failed to pay to date the amounts awarded by the Court as Just satisfaction in its judgment of 12 May 2014, that is, €30 million in respect of non-pecuniary damage suffered by the surviving relatives of the missing persans, who the Court noted "had endured decades of not knowing, which must have marked them profoundly" (§56). The Court further unconditionally ordered that €60 million be paid in respect of non- pecuniary damage suffered by the enclaved Greek Cypriot residents of the Karpas Peninsula. 6. Cyprus brings to the attention of the Deputies yet aga in, that those sums were ordered (a) to be paid in their entirety within three months (i.e. by 12 August 2014), and, (b) to be distributed by the Government of Cyprus to the individual victims. The total sums 2 now due are well in excess of €100 million . However, Turkey still remains unapologetically silent on its continued failure to pay those amounts. 7. The fact that since 2014 no relevant information on the matter has been forthcoming, and no indication of the date of payment has been provided by Turkey during proceedings before the Committee, is indicative of its provocative disregard for those proceedings and for the Court's judgments. lt is moreover evident from the fact that Turkeys' recent Memorandum: i. contains·no explanation as to why it has failed to comply with the Court's order to date (though self-evidently, no explanation could constitute an excuse); and DH-DD{2020-)1003. The Secretariat calculated the sums due as of March 2019 at €103.493,835.62. See DH-DD{2019)277. 2 DH-DD(2020)1109: Communication from Cyprus. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. ii. contains no indication or any information regarding the expected date of payment, with interest, of the just satisfaction that has been ordered in faveur of the victims of the violations of the Convention that the Court has attributed to Turkey. 8. lt is important to remind the Deputies, yet again, that the Court's just satisfaction judgment was described in the concurring opinion of Judge Pinto de Albuquerque, joined by Judge Vucinié, as "the most important contribution to peace in Europe in the history of the European Court of Human Rights". Those Judges expressed the logic of the Court's judgment in the following words: "The message to member States of the Councif of Europe is cfear: those member States that wage war, invade or support foreign armed intervention in other member States must pay for their unfawfuf actions and the consequences of their actions, and the victims, their famifies and the States of which the y are nationals have a vested and enforceab/e right to be du/y and fui/y compensated by the responsib/e warring State. War and its tragic consequences are no longer toferab/e in Europe and member States that do not camp/y with this princip/e must be made judiciaffy accountab/e for their actions, without prejudice to additionaf potitica/ consequences." 9. That passage demonstrates not only the exceptional significance of the judgment, but also the gravity of Turkey's failure to respond in any way to the binding, and unconditional, obligation placed on it by the Grand Cham ber of the Court. 10. The Court emphasised that "if just satisfaction is ordered in an inter-State case, it shou/d afways be done for the benefit o{individuaf victims" (§46, emphasis added). As in previous meetings, the Republic of Cyprus once again reiterates that it is fully committed to en su ring that individual victims will be the sole beneficiaries of the just satisfaction once it has been paid. The supervision of the Committee of Ministers, referred to in the just satisfaction judgment, will provide any additional reassurance that may reasonably be required. 11. lt is at least unfortunate, especially with regard to the functioning of the Convention system and the proceedings before the Committee, that by its failure to pay the just satisfaction awarded by the Court, years after it fell due, Turkey continues to display 3 DH-DD(2020)1109: Communication from Cyprus. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. flagrant disregard not only for her international obligations, but also for the individual victims that those amounts were intended to benefit. lndeed, the more time that goes by, the aider those victims become, and the less benefit they risk being able to derive from such just satisfaction as may eventually be paid. The consequences of Turkey's failure for the core mission of the Court and of the Convention system as a whole are, indeed, profound. By failing to comply with a judgment of such exceptional significance, Turkey threatens the effectiveness of the Convention system as a promoter of peace and a guardian of democracy and the rule of law. 12. ln light of the above, the Republic of Cyprus urges the Committee of Ministers not only to deprecate Turkey' s breach of its clear and unconditional obligations, but to take the strongest action available to it to ensure that the Court's judgments are complied with in full.